Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

need UL for new patent grounding electrode- technology is not 8 ft long (standards)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    need UL for new patent grounding electrode- technology is not 8 ft long (standards)

    We have a patented new technology from and inventor thatworks and functions as a grounding device. This electrode has been provedsuccessful in over 8 countries and more than 2,000 locations.

    This electrode is by far superior in many capabilities toany other currently available in the market (grounding rods and systems). Thistechnology differs greatly in its size and shape to the existing technologies.

    The current NFPA 70, National Electrical Code section250.52(A)(5) that is required to get a UL certification states that the minimumlength of a grounding rod is 8 ft. Our largest model is shorter than thatrequired length.

    With all this, what is the best way to obtain the ULcertification? What are our possibilities to change the norm or standards? how long would this take? Who can we hire tohelp us with this?



    #2
    Have you contact UL about what there standards are for a grounding electrode?
    They say I shot a man named Gray and took his wife to Italy
    She inherited a million bucks and when she died it came to me
    I can't help it if I'm lucky

    Comment


      #3
      yes, We have been working with a Lab here in Plano Tx - Inter tek and were about to start the safety testing, when they said that because the length is not 8ft long, regardless of the testing results, they could not give us UL certification because the NFPA code requires 8 ft long. we are not sure if this can be worked another way if we prove we are a better technology and do not have the need for 8 ft depth. any thoughts?

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by GreenInn View Post
        yes, We have been working with a Lab here in Plano Tx - Inter tek and were about to start the safety testing, when they said that because the length is not 8ft long, regardless of the testing results, they could not give us UL certification because the NFPA code requires 8 ft long. we are not sure if this can be worked another way if we prove we are a better technology and do not have the need for 8 ft depth. any thoughts?
        The reality is that unless you are willing to push getting the alternate technology accepted by the NEC folks, you are out of luck. if it is a rod, it has to be at least 8 feet long to qualify as a grounding electrode by code. There is just no way around that.

        I am curious what you could do to make the idea of a ground rod any better when ground rods as a whole are going the way of the dodo birds for most installations.

        BTW, does anyone here actually use plate electrodes? I was thinking that a 2' long piece of 3" angle would appear to comply.
        Last edited by petersonra; 06-04-12, 04:41 PM.
        Bob

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by GreenInn View Post
          We have a patented new technology from and inventor thatworks and functions as a grounding device. This electrode has been provedsuccessful in over 8 countries and more than 2,000 locations.

          This electrode is by far superior in many capabilities toany other currently available in the market (grounding rods and systems). Thistechnology differs greatly in its size and shape to the existing technologies.

          The current NFPA 70, National Electrical Code section250.52(A)(5) that is required to get a UL certification states that the minimumlength of a grounding rod is 8 ft. Our largest model is shorter than thatrequired length.

          With all this, what is the best way to obtain the ULcertification? What are our possibilities to change the norm or standards? how long would this take? Who can we hire tohelp us with this?

          There is a proposal form in the back of every NFPA 70 (NEC) book. You can also get it online. You will need to get the NEC text modifed.
          Ron

          Comment


            #6
            If the new technology/product tests and results the same as the 8' ground rod why shouldn't it replace or compliment the ground rod?
            Edward
            The only thing I know, is the progressive discovery of my ignorance

            Comment


              #7
              Only rod or pipe electrodes are required to be 8 ft. That being said, how can you patent a rod or a pipe?

              So, if your miracle device is not a rod or a pipe, the 8 ft. requirement is moot.

              If it is a plate there is no length requirement, just a surface area requirement, (2 square feet) and again, how can a plate be patented?

              So what's that leave, a sphere?

              I think the intent is to require a certain amount of surface contact with the earth, no matter what the design. I don't see how any testing could be done to prove an electrode lacking the required amount of surface would be as effective as one that has the required amount. That is just plain physics.

              If your device is patented, you are protected against plagiarism by law. So, why didn't you give us the details? If we had the details, we would be in a better position to try to explain why the device may not be able to be listed.
              Cheers and Stay Safe,

              Marky the Sparky

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by petersonra View Post

                BTW, does anyone here actually use plate electrodes? I was thinking that a 2' long piece of 3" angle would appear to comply.
                A piece of angle iron is not a plate. Folding the metal would encroach on the sphere of influence and make it much less effective.
                Cheers and Stay Safe,

                Marky the Sparky

                Comment


                  #9
                  here is an interesting grounding device that does not appear to meet the minimum requirements. yet it is touted as "better" somehow.

                  http://www.oklahomadesigntech.com/saftelectroplate.html
                  Bob

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by petersonra View Post
                    here is an interesting grounding device that does not appear to meet the minimum requirements. yet it is touted as "better" somehow.

                    http://www.oklahomadesigntech.com/saftelectroplate.html
                    Tout away, it's still a few square inches shy of being acceptable by the NEC.

                    Also, a twisted ribbon is not a plate and does not fall into any acceptable NEC electrode category unless it is listed.
                    Last edited by K8MHZ; 06-04-12, 05:03 PM.
                    Cheers and Stay Safe,

                    Marky the Sparky

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by K8MHZ View Post
                      Tout away, it's still a few square inches shy of being acceptable by the NEC.

                      Also, a twisted ribbon is not a plate and does not fall into any acceptable NEC electrode category unless it is listed.
                      I might be inclined to accept it as a plate. But it would have to have 288 sq inches of surface area to qualify as a plate type GE. And would still have to be buried 30" deep. The code does not say the plate can't be twisted.

                      It certainly would not qualify as a rod. It just plain is not a rod. And there is no way it could meet the minimum diameter requirements since it does not have a diameter.
                      Last edited by petersonra; 06-04-12, 05:08 PM.
                      Bob

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I believe that you have 2 issues to deal with. You can get the listing but the NEC wording, as presently written, will not allow it anyway. My guess is to take the plunge and get it approved and then work on getting the NEC to amend the NEC. Unfortunately the deadly for the 2014 NEC has already past so it wouldn't be till 2017 that this would happen unless you can get a TIA- this is a tentative interim amendment but I am not sure of that process.

                        I would suggest contacting someone from NFPA
                        They say I shot a man named Gray and took his wife to Italy
                        She inherited a million bucks and when she died it came to me
                        I can't help it if I'm lucky

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Dennis Alwon View Post
                          I believe that you have 2 issues to deal with. You can get the listing but the NEC wording, as presently written, will not allow it anyway. My guess is to take the plunge and get it approved and then work on getting the NEC to amend the NEC. Unfortunately the deadly for the 2014 NEC has already past so it wouldn't be till 2017 that this would happen unless you can get a TIA- this is a tentative interim amendment but I am not sure of that process.

                          I would suggest contacting someone from NFPA
                          I would be willing to bet that the listing standards require it to comply with the NEC requirements, along with what ever other requirements there are.
                          Bob

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Unfortunately, it won’t pass TIA muster either; you must establish that there is an “emergency” need for it.

                            One of the undocumented purposes of Section 500.8(A) was to allow “...manufacturer’s self evaluation or an owner’s engineering judgment” as a basis for identified products and installations in classified locations. It more-or-less summarizes OSHA 29 CFR 1910 399, Acceptable and adds "owner’s engineering judgment" to "manufacturer’s self evaluation." While there are quacks in every profession, we PEs aren't quite as loose with our seals as some may believe. Again unfortunately, there is no general concept like this in the NEC.
                            "Bob"
                            Robert B. Alexander, P.E.
                            Answers based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by petersonra View Post
                              I might be inclined to accept it as a plate. But it would have to have 288 sq inches of surface area to qualify as a plate type GE. And would still have to be buried 30" deep. The code does not say the plate can't be twisted.

                              It certainly would not qualify as a rod. It just plain is not a rod. And there is no way it could meet the minimum diameter requirements since it does not have a diameter.
                              The NEC does not define 'plate' so let's see how Webster defines it.

                              a : a smooth flat thin piece of material b (1) : forged, rolled, or cast metal in sheets usually thicker than 1⁄4 inch (6 millimeters)
                              We can see it's not flat, so it doesn't qualify as 'a plate'. If it were sheet metal 1/4" or thicker, it would be 'metal plate'. Webster differentiates between 'a plate', which is a shape, and 'plate metal' which is a product.

                              The NEC differentiates between 'plate electrodes' (a shape) and 'electrodes of iron or steel plates' (products). It also differentiates between ferrous and non-ferrous. 'Iron or steel plates' shall be at least 1/4" thick. Non-ferrous electrodes only need to be 1.5 mm thick. Note, the non-ferrous requirement is not for 'plate metal', so it must be 'a plate' in shape to qualify.

                              'Sheet metal' electrodes are not permitted.

                              So, if we take 250.2 literally, the twisty thing wouldn't be permitted unless listed even if it did have the required amount of surface contact.
                              Last edited by K8MHZ; 06-05-12, 10:05 AM.
                              Cheers and Stay Safe,

                              Marky the Sparky

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X